аЯрЁБс>ўџ 35ўџџџ2џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџьЅС @ №ПKbjbjqфqф " ŽŽKџџџџџџˆФФФФФФФи€ € € € Œ иіЌ Ќ Ќ Ќ Ќ Ќ Ќ Ќ – ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ $ R_fМ Ф2 Ќ Ќ 2 2 М ФФЌ Ќ б P P P 2 FФЌ ФЌ – P 2 – P P ФФP Ќ   ађSжЉШ€ x P – ч 0P ХŽ ЌХP ииФФФФP &ХФv Ќ 0м "P ў  Ќ Ќ Ќ М М ии„\$: ии\Brian Stephenson Federated Mountain Clubs president Walking Access Bill goes to Select Committee The Walking Access Bill passed its first reading on 15 April 2008 and has gone to the Local Government and Environment Select Committee. The Committee will take submissions until 21 May and is due to report back to the House on 31 July. The Bill grew out of a concern that changing patterns of land use and changing attitudes of landowners were eroding the New Zealand custom of allowing trampers, climbers and others to cross private land in the course of their chosen recreation. The Bill passed its first reading by 112 votes to 8. The substantial cross-party support shows how far the proposal has come in the three years since the polarised debates between farmers and recreational groups in 2005. At the heart of the Bill is the creation of the Walking Access Commission, "to lead and support the establishment, maintenance and improvement of walking access." The Bill also absorbs the present New Zealand Walkways Act 1990. As a result, the word count of walkways-related provisions has led some to think that walkways are the Bill's main focus. Not so. Walkways are only one of the Commission's 13 functions. 10 of its 13 functions relate to "walking access" and make no mention of walkways. All of the mechanisms of existing land law are available for the creation of walking access. They are in the Land Transfer Act 1952, the Crown Entities Act 2004 and elsewhere. That is why they are not replicated in the Walking Access Bill. Walkways, then, are just one tool in the kit. They are unlikely to be the most frequently used one. In the 18 years since the passing of the New Zealand Walkways Act, an average of only one gazetted walkway per year has been created. Many tracks are called "walkways" in guidebooks but do not have that status in law, because the full process has never been completed. In securing new walking access, registered easements are likely to be the handiest instrument. Unformed legal roads will also have an important part to play. As a member of the Advisory Board involved in setting up the Walking Access Commission, I have rapidly come to appreciate that every access problem presents its own peculiar challenge. In finding solutions to each one, creativity and flexibility will count for a lot. Additional comment from Brian… "Public land" is not as much of a worry as it first appears. It's defined as any land that is not private land (see cl 2), so it includes land which is closed to the public under other acts - e.g., defence land, the grounds of prisons, quarantine areas, and so on. The expression "public land" is not synonymous with "public conservation land." As the Bill stands, what happens to unformed legal roads in relation to public access is over to the Commission. My view is that the Commission should be reluctant to interfere with the high quality of access provided by the status of legal road. There is no absolute reason why a walkway should be designated over an unformed legal road. There is no reason why, for example, a walkway should not stop at a legal road and resume when it leaves the legal road. I think a lot of people are reading the Bill as if the walkways provisions are in block capitals, bolded, and are the central concept. They aren't. As I said in my Bulletin column, walkways are just one arrow in the quiver. It's difficult for people who have to read the draft statute without a background in the many and varied devices of land law. The statute assumes that everyone has the rest of the land law jigsaw in their heads. Of course they haven't. However the alternative, of trying to codify the whole of land law in a statute, is just too horrifying to contemplate. For conspiracy theorists, it will of course be business as usual, undaunted by the facts or the law. Regards Brian 46ЎЏђѓ< = › œ у ф . / z { Ф Х w x О П U V Ÿ   ц ч r s О П  cdЋЌії@Aжз"#z{ТУ  :<=>\^JKђфђфђгфгфгфгфгфгфгфгфгфгфгфгфгфгфгфгфгфгфгфгфгфгфгфгфгфгфгфгЯОЯКЯКЯhЇNA hЇNAhХi$CJOJQJ^JaJhХi$ hХi$hХi$CJOJQJ^JaJhЇNACJOJQJ^JaJhХi$CJOJQJ^JaJC56deU V , - % & ./=>]^ЙК‰ŠklmњњњњњњњњњњњњњњњњњњњњѕѕѕѕѕѕѕѕgdЇNAgdХi$Kўmде:;CDJKњњњњњњњјgdЇNA 1hАа/ Ар=!А"А# $ %Аœ@@ёџ@ NormalCJ_HaJmH sH tH DA@ђџЁD Default Paragraph FontRi@ѓџГR  Table Normalі4ж l4жaі (k@єџС(No Liste@ђ Хi$HTML Preformatted7 Ц2”(М Pфx  4 Ш#\'№*„.2Ќ5@9CJOJQJ^JaJmH sH K џџџџ56deUV,-%&./= > ] ^ Й К ‰ Š  k l m де:;CDJM˜0€€А˜0€€˜0€€x˜0€€x˜0€€x˜0€€˜0€€x˜0€€ €˜0€€x˜0€€˜0€€А˜0€€˜0€€Р˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€x˜0€€˜0€€x˜0€€ €˜0€€Ј˜0€€ ˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€ €˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€€˜0€€˜0€€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€€˜0€€ˆ˜0€€ˆ˜0€€€˜0€€ˆdeUV,-%&./= > ] ^ Й К ‰ Š  k l m де:;CDJMЪ@0иЪ@0иЪ@0иЪ@0иЪ@0иЪ@0иЪ@0иЪ@0иЪ@0иЪ@0иЪ@0иЪ@0иЪ@0иЪ@0€Ш@0€Ъ@0€Ш@0€Ъ@0ЌШ@0ЌЪ@0ЌШ@0ЌЪ@0ЌШ@0ЌШ@0ЌШ@0ЌЪ@0ЌШ@0ЌЪ@0ЌШ@0ЌШ@0€Ш@0€Ш@0€ и€фй.K mK KџџНЕЋдоОЕЋД+ПЕЋl™ЮЮMІййM8*€urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags€date€9*€urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags€place€B*€urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags€country-region€ €15€2008€4€Day€Month€Yearч№йсV \ г е % , M> ] MrsОП  cdЋЌії@Aжз"#z{ТУ Z \ JMV \ MХP”8y:6kхХi$ЇNAџ@€\ \ „§Ѓ№№\ \ K@@џџUnknownџџџџџџџџџџџџG‡z €џTimes New Roman5€Symbol3& ‡z €џArial?5 ‡z €џCourier New"qˆ№аh+эФF4эФFH H !№ ДДr4DD3ƒ№HP)№џ?фџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџХi$џџBrian Stephenson FMCpeterpeterўџр…ŸђљOhЋ‘+'Гй0x˜ИФдрьќ  4 @ LX`hpфBrian Stephenson FMCpeterNormalpeter2Microsoft Word 10.0@0@еЉШ@xlIжЉШH ўџеЭеœ.“—+,љЎ0ќ hp|„Œ” œЄЌД М нфDЗ Brian Stephenson FMC Title ўџџџўџџџ !ўџџџ#$%&'()ўџџџ+,-./01ўџџџ§џџџ4ўџџџўџџџўџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџRoot Entryџџџџџџџџ РFАhSжЉШ6€Data џџџџџџџџџџџџ1TableџџџџХWordDocumentџџџџ" SummaryInformation(џџџџџџџџџџџџ"DocumentSummaryInformation8џџџџџџџџ*CompObjџџџџџџџџџџџџjџџџџџџџџџџџџўџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџўџ џџџџ РFMicrosoft Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.8є9Вq